B. Mr. Peter Dunbar Pasco County cannot go along with the District
holding developers within Pasco County to the water crop theory while
"77 million cjaions per day" were being pumped out of Pasco so that
develotrent of Nzorhwest Hillsborough and Pinallas Counties can continue.
He also stated that the proposal has the potential to be very detrimental to
Pasco (the Chairman agreed). Pasco will continue, however, in good faith,
but with the warning that should this show of good faith be trod upon by other
parties Pcsco will not hesitate to take the matter into court.

C. Mr. Jake Varn The efforts to date have been addressed toward finding
a solution to the immediate problems and nothing is contained in this proposal
that addresses itself toward the solution to long range problems. He also
pointed out that the time is going to come when people living adjacent to
the Cypress Creeck Well Field are going to waitt to use the water beneath
their property. He further stated that if these people are barred from the
use of the water beneath their land because of pumping from the Cypress
Creek Well Field it would mean that someone is going to "be faced with a
very serious legal problem."

This represents to the best of my ability an accurate representation of the final outcome
of the August 23rd meeting. A quick check of the tapes however (if checking 9 hours
of tape can be accomplished quickly) will clarify any doubts you may have as to
accuracy of my paraphrasing.

EDV:mch

Memorandum
Ret Special Workshop Session
August 30, 1973
Page 3

7. Chairman McAteer stated that the joint venture whereby funds from the District
and Pinellas County would be combined to purchase the Cypress Creek FDA does not
mean that the Di8rrict would relinquish any of Its regulatory authority or in any way
result In preferential treatment for Pinellas County.

8. The Cypress Cr^.: production facilities as well as the right to use them would be
transferred to the regional production authority at such time as it Is created. Reason-
able and just consideration would be made for any capitol investments by an individual
governmental unit in the initial development of the well field.

9. Before and after creation of the regional production authority and transfer of the
Cypress Creek production facilities, the District retains the authority to operate the
Flood Detention Area for flood control purposes.

10. In regard to the pipeline easement to Cypress Creek along the SCLRR right-of-
way:

A. In exchange for the District withdrawing its motion to Intervene in
Plnellas County's condemnation suit, Pinellas County will stipulate that
at such time as the regional production authority is created the easement
will be transferred to the authority's ownership. (Stierheim said he would
have to poll his commissioners but that he felt such an arrangement would
be agreeable. Mr. Linn stated that if the easement and pipeline are turned
over to a regional authority and St. Petersburg is justly compensated for its
investment, he would recommend doing so to the City Council. He agreed
that the City is only concerned that it have a source of water, that it will
receive compensation for its investments, and that it has no motives to profit
by the transaction.)

B. It was agreed that the District would withdraw its motion to Intervene
in good faith that the Pinellas County Board and the St. Petersburg City
Council would be agreeable to the above stipulation.

11. Comments by Pasco County:

A. Mr. George Knoblock Pasco County has been "systematically
carved to pieces" and he sees no c:surances that the carving will not
continue. He took exception to any belief that all parties concerned
are In accord. HI stated that no assurances had been given that there
would be no further well field construction in Pcsco County by Pinellas
or St. Pctcr:'urg. He was sure his Cocrd would not approve the proposals
being presented at this time but that an careement from Pinellas and St.
Petersburg not to plan additional well fields In Pcsco County "would go

Memorandum
Re: Special Workshop Session
August 30, 1973
Page 2

IV. Pasco County will receive:

A. 10 r.cd from Starkey Well Field. (It was unclear whether or not this
figure includes the 4 mgd capacity expected by New Port Richey
from development of the wells the District has already permitted to
be ccrtrctcd in the Starkey Well Field.)

In the course of the discussion which followed these points were clearly brought
out:

1. Although the discussion was in reference to gallonage, the District, in all well
fields, will regulcat withdrawals by establishing a minimum elevation to which the
control level can be lowered. These levels will be derived from and will be based
upon unbiased and extensive hydrologic investigations.

2. There is no hydrologic guarantee at this time that Cypress Creek will be able to
produce 45-50 mgd and still meet the restrictive criteria that will be established by
the District.

3. If it is found after sound hydrologic investigation that Cypress Creek is capable
of producing more than 45 mgd, all over that amount will be allocated to the District
for distribution to areas in need as the District Board so determines.

4. An additional source of water (mentioned In passing) is that which would be made
available by the construction of a salt-water barrier on the Anclote River.

5. Mr. Stierheim Indicated that as part of Pincllas County's agreement to the proposal
presented, there should be a committee appointed which would be comprised of repre-
sentatives from ail concerned governmental units and which would begin immediately
to work with the Disrict toward creating a tri-county or regional water production
authority. The recommendation of the committee could then be presented to the
Legislature.

6. The District will proceed toward reaching an agreement with Pinellas County
whereby purchase oi the Cypress Creek Flood C[;ention Area could be expedited
thus making it available as a source of water sooner than if the District were to ac-
quire it by normal r.:;ihod. The agreement would be such that Pinellas County would
be provided the c;:srances necessary to sell bonds but that ownership in fee would
remain with the Di::rict. (Mr. Sbierheim pointed out this would have to be worked
out and that it would still be contingent upon caroval by the Pinellas County Board
of Commissioners. He conceded that It was at least an idea to be explored further.)

August 30, 1973

MEMORANDUM

TO: DONALD R. FEASTER, Executive Director

FROM: E. D. VEGARA, Administrative Assistant

RE: Board of Governors Special Work Session held August 23, 1973.

There has been no attempt here to relate all the discussion that took place during the
nine hour meeting, only the essence of what was generally agreed to and certain
important comments that I felt would add to a clearer understanding of the final con-
sensus.

To resolve the current problems of all parties, the following distribution of water was
found to be tentatively acceptable to each of those governmental units represented at
the meeting, with the possible exception of Pasco County as will be pointed out later:

1. St. Petersburg will receive:

A. 12 mgd from Cosme Odessa Well Field
B. 10 mgd from Section 21 Well Field
C. 12 mgd from St. Petersburge-Pasco Well Field
D. 15 mgd from Cypress Creek Well Field

giving the city a total of 49 mgd.

II. Pinellas County will receive:

A. 30 mgd from Cypress Creek Well Field
B. 22 mgd from Eldridge-Wilde Well Field
C. 5 mod from East Lake Road. Well Field
D. 5 mgd from Starkey Well Field
E. 7 mgd from right-of-way pipeline easement to Cypress Creek

for a total of 69 mgd.

Ill. Hillsborough County will receive:

A. 8 mnrd from a well site to be established along Sheldon Road
B. 11 nrrd will be provided from Pinelcas County and St. Petersburg's
combined allocation. (It was agreed that attorneys Dunlap and
Brown would work out the details of the purchase.)